Editor Findings

On Feb. 18th, 2011, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow made this claim on air while covering the dispute between labor unions and Wisconsin's Republican governor, Scott Walker:

"Despite what you may have heard about Wisconsin's finances, the state is on track to have a budget surplus this year."

Maddow argued that Gov. Walker manufactured a state budget crisis in order to use the opportunity to clamp down on labor and other spending programs favored by liberals.

Although Walker has been caught making false claims of his own during his dispute with labor unions, these do not bear on Maddow's claims about the state's budget. We find her above assertion to be FALSE.

On Feb. 18th, 2011, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow made this claim on air while covering the dispute between labor unions and Wisconsin's Republican governor, Scott Walker:

"Despite what you may have heard about Wisconsin's finances, the state is on track to have a budget surplus this year."

Maddow argued that Gov. Walker manufactured a state budget crisis in order to use the opportunity to clamp down on labor and other spending programs favored by liberals.

Although Walker has been caught making false claims of his own during his dispute with labor unions, these do not bear on Maddow's claims about the state's budget. We find her above assertion to be FALSE.

At the time this verdict was issued, out of 86 Truthsquad respondents, 44 found Maddow's statement to be true, 25 said false, and 17 were not sure. The clear majority of participants supported Maddow's assertion, several of them expressing their views fervently in their notes:

ANSWER:TRUEGovernor Walker is an extremist who has artificially created a deficit by irresponsibly reducing taxes and who now hopes to balance the budget on the backs of state employees and undermine their collective bargaining rights as well. his ultimate aim is to defund the state government and render it in effectual.

We appreciate hearing the personal views of our members about politicians and events in the news. However, arguments like these do not directly address the claim we are fact-checking here: was Rachel Maddow right or wrong when she stated that this year's budget was initially projected to be in surplus? Can we point to verifiable factual evidence that supports or opposes this statement?
According to PolitiFact Wisconsin and the Pulitzer prize winning Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Maddow, as well as other sources making this argument, cited this Jan. 31, 2011 memo from Robert Lang, the director of the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, to support her claim. The memo states: "Our analysis indicates a general fund gross balance of $121.4 million and a net balance of $56.4 million."

Maddow apparently based her claim directly on this statement, without examining it further, even though other news sources had reported a significant projected shortfall. PolitiFact Wisconsin, meanwhile, investigated this memo more thoroughly, and found that it also included $258 million in unpaid expenses and expected shortfalls, as well as $58.7 million owed to the state of Minnesota. Subtracting these from the balance pointed out in Lang's earlier statement results in the $137 million shortfall cited by Gov. Walker and widely reported in the media.

When Maddow and others cite Walker's projected $140 million in business tax cuts as the cause of the current budget shortfall, they point out that the tax cut is, more or less, the same size as this reported 2011 shortfall. However, as PolitiFact reminds us, these tax cuts are slated for the next budget cycle, not the current one. The similarity in these numbers is coincidental.

PolitiFact followed up with Lang to determine why he included the confusing sentence that appeared to indicate a surplus. They write that "Lang, a veteran and respected civil servant working in a nonpartisan job, told us he does not want to presume what legislative or other action will be taken to address the potential shortfalls he lists." This is a careful practice, but in this case, it led to confusion.

That confusion clears up if one reads the rest of Lang's memo, or looks at the actual budget tables summarized in it. It appears that Maddow and her staff did not do so.

Many Truthsquad participants seem to have trusted Maddow's claim on reputation alone. Melva Hackney voted "True," writing, "If I must choose between Fox and Maddow, it's Maddow by a mile!", even though Fox News is not cited in this investigation. Jeff Harris stated, "I trust Rachel. She will also tell us if she is in error."

But this is the second Truthsquad on a claim by Rachel Maddow, and the first found her statement false as well. We at NewsTrust think this is an important lesson, which can help us learn to remain unbiased when considering statements of fact in the news. Even personalities whom we trust are capable of making false or inaccurate statements. In this case, Maddow did not carefully research her claim before making it on air, even though the follow-ups made by PolitiFact should be routine for any journalist.

Whether or not Gov. Walker has made sound budgeting decisions is an entirely separate question from the one we have asked here. Regarding Wisconsin's 2011 budget, the claim that a surplus is projected is demonstrably false, and Walker's tax cuts proposed for the next budget do not apply.

Community Findings

Maddow could simply have asked the author of the memo she used whether her interpretation was correct. Better yet, she could have looked at the primary source: the actual budget. The Walker tax cut argument doesn't hold up; it's for the NEXT budget period, not the current one.

Based on the factual evidence from the nonpartisan Lang memo, it appears that Rachel Maddow and her team did not do their homework thoroughly. By contrast, I found the analysis by PolitiFact AND the Journal Sentinel to be well researched and fairly presented. I'm disappointed that Maddow would make such a bold statement without checking the facts in more depth; at the very least, she could have qualified her statement with disclaimers. In my view, this type of opinion news does not help the public debate, no matter which side of the political spectrum it comes from. We need more factual verification, less opinionated assertions.

Governor Walker is an extremist who has artificially created a deficit by irresponsibly reducing taxes and who now hopes to balance the budget on the backs of state employees and undermine their collective bargaining rights as well. his ultimate aim is to defund the state government and render it in effectual.

The statement may be true, but it circumvents the issue(the right to collective bargaining) when the public service unions have already indicated they are prepared to make pay concessions, as Maddow, herself, has attested.

A very important question is raised, when someone who has been and/or is currently trusted as a news source is shown to be in error, for whatever the reason. For those having even a modest interest in the news, the tendency is to settle on an individual, or in this case a Cable station as the source to be trusted.
Few individuals will do for themselves what NewsTrust does for its readers -- fact check, and that can be for only a few facts at best. It's a dilemma.

When you check the data she uses; Yuo will find it to be very confusing. Not that the data is all that difficult,it's just that it's so poorly written that it is very easy to get confused or overlook something. But come on Rachel your a pro.Right?

add even if not for the tax break for millionaires, the deficit is relatively minor and perhaps even based on outdated figures of the state of the market in previous years. In any case, taxpayers don't fund pensions.

Substitute "was" for "is" and this is completely true. The gist of the piece is that Gov. Walker engineered the "crisis" by sponsoring huge tax cuts. That is true, and the point that the state workers are not to blame is true.

Just as Bob Herrschaft stated Rachel Maddow's quote, entertaining as it might be, does not address the central issue which is "collective bargaining". What confounds me is that no one is asking how we got here in the first place?

Maddow did clarify on her show. Prior to the Governor's tax cuts, they were projected to have a surplus... Even if that was an error, not even a very big deficit would justify busting the unions. It may justify union concessions, but not taking away bargaining rights...
BTW: Newsbusters issues a constant stream of lies... If the politifact article is true (http://politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/feb/18/rachel-maddow/rachel-maddow-says-wisconsin-track-have-budget-sur/), it doesn't change the fact that the overall Recession which killed jobs were caused by the financial industry and ideological allies of the Scott Walker types out there.

If I must choose between Fox and Maddow, it's Maddow by a mile! Unfortunately, in order to get rid of Fox and CNN, I lost MSNBC. I very rarely see her online, but she was much more interested in reporting NEWS, instead of the silly rhetoric and lies of the other two stations.

I wish this were true, and without paying its bills and obligations it probably is. I have also heard that the surplus was sucked up by a Walker tax cut for businesses, but my understanding is that the tax cut is for the next budget, not the current one. Certainly Walker turning down the $800 million plus and the more than 5,000 high paying jobs and continued maintenance jobs (mostly paid for by the Federal Govt) and related businesses won't help Wisconsin's budget problems. Those things would have brought in much needed revenue to Wisconsin.

While one nonpartisan state official did issue a report with a $45 million dollar budget surplus listed for the year ending his report is specifically made to not include possible or expected buget actions before the legislature. The budget, when taken as a whole, could not be considered to be in surplus (Politifact has an excellent WI page up). However it remains, all indications are this was the hail mary pass of union busting. For whatever it is worth, the Koch brothers were big contributors to Walker's campaign. Please note, this is a change in position on this matter.

This is one of the worst cases of cherry-picking I have encountered. I am honestly amazed that people are still evaluating and arguing over the 'truth' of this statement. It is flatly and obviously false...and that was precisely Rachel's point. It is SUPPOSED to be false. Instead of picking out this one statement from her opening segment where this quote appears, we should evaluate the other content before and around it as well. Indeed, we should be evaluating her entire stance or 'take'(as PolitiFact calls it) on Wisconsin in context. Guess what happens, almost every thing she says leading up to the correct status of the budget is false...again, it was the entire point. It was all a rhetorical device used to grab the audience's attention. You are arguing over whether or not something which was intended to be false is true.

they should send her on the same boat as her buddy, Kieth oberman, they're both talk through the side of there mouth,(and I am trying to be polite) I have always though she was a moron and gets her talking points for the other moron in the white house

They are all referring to the Lang memo. That thing is always confusing. He claims that he doesn't want to presume what the legislators will do. AFter that "surplus", there are subtractions for medicaid and a debt owed to Minnesota and a few other things, coming to the $137 million deficit figure. One thing NOT included is a pending court judgement that could jump the deficit to $340 million, but likely won't hit until the next fiscal cycle. The tax cut to businesses doesn't take effect until next cycle, so it is NOT the reason there is a deficit.
If Maddow is so smart, how come she can't figure this stuff out? All the regular reporters in WI know how to read that memo.